Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Helgoland]

Because the old one got trolled. Resume!

[Loud Whispers]

Too soon?

[Graknorke]

What's too soon?
Anway, I'd like to clarify to Misko that the post I was responding to was about definitions. So a dictionary is perfectly applicable.

[Virex]

As far as I know, the problem of the last thread got banned for being a supreme ass. Also, I hope this one goes a bit slower. It's no fun to make a well-thought out 3-paragraph argument only to get buried under one-liners and mosquito-prick arguments.

What's too soon?
Anway, I'd like to clarify to Misko that the post I was responding to was about definitions. So a dictionary is perfectly applicable.

English dictionaries are descriptive, not proscriptive. This means that the dictionary tried to reflect proper usage, instead of the other way around. This means that you cannot claim truth from a dictionary definition, since the dictionary doesn't even pretend to be an authority. What you should be doing instead is asking exactly what the other party means and arguing from that definition, or propose a better definition if that is beneficial to the discussion.

[Helgoland]

Yup

[Mlamlah]

I would like to put this in because... i already wrote it.

Well, women get help if they are the "victim", no matter how stupid the problem. Men are told to "man up" and are laughed at or shamed if they cry or ask for help, no matter how severe the problem.

"Let's keep patriarchy because all of my biggest complaints about feminism come from the fact that it still exists."

That's literally what you are saying.

I do not understand how not helping men is a sign of a patriarchy?
That's pretty much the opposite way round. People in power get help. People not in power get left to deal with their own problems.

I think i understand what is going on here.
Okay, let me explain something again, it *is* entirely possible for both parties involved to be oppressed. The problem is *not* necessarily the other party, treating the other side like an enemy is just going to worsen all problems involved. Men have a lot of problems imposed upon them by *society*, not the feminist movement, standing against the feminist movement is *not* going to make men any more equal.
Men are seen as being strong and independant, they pretty much always have, maybe *that* has more to do with the problems you are citing. Basically "Why would men need help? They are supposed to be strong." Is what becomes a subconscious stance, when really this just hurts them my making it harder for them to reach out for help, be it emotional or whatever else. The problem is not feminism, the problem is how we think about gender and it's place in society, how we've allowed it to become hard-wired in the way we live our lives.

[Graknorke]

I would like to put this in because... i already wrote it.

Well, women get help if they are the "victim", no matter how stupid the problem. Men are told to "man up" and are laughed at or shamed if they cry or ask for help, no matter how severe the problem.

"Let's keep patriarchy because all of my biggest complaints about feminism come from the fact that it still exists."

That's literally what you are saying.

I do not understand how not helping men is a sign of a patriarchy?
That's pretty much the opposite way round. People in power get help. People not in power get left to deal with their own problems.

I think i understand what is going on here.
Okay, let me explain something again, it *is* entirely possible for both parties involved to be oppressed. The problem is *not* necessarily the other party, treating the other side like an enemy is just going to worsen all problems involved. Men have a lot of problems imposed upon them by *society*, not the feminist movement, standing against the feminist movement is *not* going to make men any more equal.
Men are seen as being strong and independant, they pretty much always have, maybe *that* has more to do with the problems you are citing. Basically "Why would men need help? They are supposed to be strong." Is what becomes a subconscious stance, when really this just hurts them my making it harder for them to reach out for help, be it emotional or whatever else. The problem is not feminism, the problem is how we think about gender and it's place in society, how we've allowed it to become hard-wired in the way we live our lives.

I understand that.
My main thing was the use of the word "patriarchy". It's that the comment I replied to pretty heavily implied that men were deliberately setting things up so that men could be shamed by society because of expectations that men set up; with that word.

[Virex]

I've linked to the wiki page on Hegemonic masculinity before, but I'll keep doing it until someone notices me or I get bored.
Anyway, what it says is that a lot of men benefit from adhering to the ideal of masculinity. Once you lose that, you lose a lot of your privilege (I can use that word, right?). Since being a victim is un-masculine, being a victim makes you lose your 'right' to help from the patriarchy. It's shitty, isn't it? We're taught to buy into the patriarchy all the time as men, but once we need it, it lets us fall like a tortoise that jumped from the top floor of the empire state building.


Also, to those confused by the word 'patriarchy', this link may help indoctrinate you clear up your confusion.

[Willfor]

See Virex and Mlamlah's posts for my reply. Except my reply had a lot more sarcasm about the use of a dictionary argument.

[Graknorke]

I've linked to the wiki page on Hegemonic masculinity before, but I'll keep doing it until someone notices me or I get bored.
Anyway, what it says is that a lot of men benefit from adhering to the ideal of masculinity. Once you lose that, you lose a lot of your privilege (I can use that word, right?). Since being a victim is un-masculine, being a victim makes you lose your 'right' to help from the patriarchy. It's shitty, isn't it? We're taught to buy into the patriarchy all the time as men, but once we need it, it drops us like a stone.


Also, to those confused by the word 'patriarchy', this link may help indoctrinate you clear up your confusion.

I'm not entirely sure what you mean by that first paragraph. Men get a benefit from not being offered help? I don't really see that. It's not use being seen as acceptable by society if that nets you absolutely nothing. If you become un-masculine, then you lose your right to refuse and ignore any potential help; or to receiving any further help.

And the second doesn't sit too great with me, that the word patriarchy is supposedly gender neutral in the way feminism is said to be gender neutral. The latter has been removed as an issue in this thread, but the idea of patriarchy not focusing on men seems like it was a switching of what is said about it to not come across as openly relating the oppressors to men, but the terminology was already too in use to change it.

[Virex]

I've linked to the wiki page on Hegemonic masculinity before, but I'll keep doing it until someone notices me or I get bored.
Anyway, what it says is that a lot of men benefit from adhering to the ideal of masculinity. Once you lose that, you lose a lot of your privilege (I can use that word, right?). Since being a victim is un-masculine, being a victim makes you lose your 'right' to help from the patriarchy. It's shitty, isn't it? We're taught to buy into the patriarchy all the time as men, but once we need it, it drops us like a stone.


Also, to those confused by the word 'patriarchy', this link may help indoctrinate you clear up your confusion.

I'm not entirely sure what you mean by that first paragraph. Men get a benefit from not being offered help? I don't really see that. It's not use being seen as acceptable by society if that nets you absolutely nothing. If you become un-masculine, then you lose your right to refuse and ignore any potential help; or to receiving any further help.

Men get a benefit from being strong and independent. Victims are seen as weak and dependent. Being weak and dependent gets you labeled a 'sissy', 'pussy' or 'mommy boy'. That carries over to male victims as well.

And the second doesn't sit too great with me, that the word patriarchy is supposedly gender neutral in the way feminism is said to be gender neutral. The latter has been removed as an issue in this thread, but the idea of patriarchy not focusing on men seems like it was a switching of what is said about it to not come across as openly relating the oppressors to men, but the terminology was already too in use to change it.

The word patriarchy is not meant to be gender neutral, since the world is not gender neutral. The patriarchy rewards masculinity and teaches men to be masculine (or, what it sees as men. God forbid you're a transman). It is a system that benefits most men that stay within the rules of the system. A man can 'drop out' (not that there's a hard divide of course, but you get the idea), but it's nearly impossible for a woman or a transman or a non-gender binary person to get in.[/quote]

[Graknorke]

And the second doesn't sit too great with me, that the word patriarchy is supposedly gender neutral in the way feminism is said to be gender neutral. The latter has been removed as an issue in this thread, but the idea of patriarchy not focusing on men seems like it was a switching of what is said about it to not come across as openly relating the oppressors to men, but the terminology was already too in use to change it.

The word patriarchy is not meant to be gender neutral, since the world is not gender neutral. The patriarchy rewards masculinity and teaches men to be masculine (or, what it sees as men. God forbid you're a transman). It is a system that benefits most men that stay within the rules of the system. A man can 'drop out' (not that there's a hard divide of course, but you get the idea), but it's nearly impossible for a woman or a transman or a non-gender binary person to get in.

That's what the article you linked says pretty much. That a patriarchy is just to do with how much people value gender differences in society, regardless of whether or not it is biased.

[Virex]

Well, yeah, but it refers specifically to a society that prefers masculinity over femininity, and as a result of that, prefers men over non-men. If the roles were flipped, you'd have a matriarchy. Both patriarchies and matriarchies are examples of kyriarchies, which are societies in which one social group is privileged with respect to other groups. If neither gender is preferred you have a gender-essentialist egalitarian society, for which there currently is no proper name.

[Helgoland]

But the patriarchy also rewards femininity in women, or punishes masculinity in women, right?

[Virex]

But the patriarchy also rewards femininity in women, or punishes masculinity in women, right?

True, but at the same time it punishes femininity in general. After all, the qualities associated with masculinity are those associated with power and influence. So while feminine women are preferred over masculine women, masculine men are still preferred over feminine women.